THE DISCIPLINE FILE
Case No. 17-019-RDO continued
g. The parties are unaware of any precedents that would assist in determining the appropriate Orders in this case. 24. Although there is a presumption that RDOs are normally published in a manner that identifies the name of the permit holder or member who is the subject of the RDO, publication without the name is being recommended in this case, given the con- cern that publishing the RDO with [Permit Holder A’s] name will indirectly identify the name of the Complainant. This is a consideration in this case, given that the RDO refers to the Complainant’s employment circumstances. Signed, [PERMIT HOLDER A REPRESENTATIVE], P.ENG. KEVIN WILLIS, P.ENG. Panel Chair, APEGA Investigative Committee CHRIS GOULARD, P.ENG. Panel Chair, APEGA Discipline Committee Date: January 15, 2018
to APEGA as part of a settlement was inappropriate and did not consider that it could potentially impair APEGA’s ability to fulfill its statutory mandate; b. [Permit Holder A]’s actions were not intentional; c. [Permit Holder A] accepted responsibility for its actions at the earliest opportunity, thereby avoiding the need for a lengthy and protracted investigation or hearing; d. There is no evidence that [Permit Holder A] has engaged in a pattern of conduct, and this is therefore an isolated incident; e. [Permit Holder A’s] actions did not impact the Investigative Committee’s investigation of the First Complaint, and the investigation proceeded despite the Complainant’s attempt to withdraw the First Complaint; f. Publication of the Recommended Discipline Order will serve to educate APEGA’s members with respect to this issue and will also serve as a deterrent; and
Date: December 19, 2017
Case No.: 17-020-RDO
IN THE MATTER OF THE ENGINEERING AND GEOSCIENCE PROFESSIONS ACT, AND IN THE MATTER OF THE CONDUCT OF MR. HARPREET S. DINSA, P.ENG.
The Investigative Committee of the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA) has investigated the conduct of Mr. Harpreet S. Dinsa, P.Eng., with respect to allegations of unprofessional conduct pursuant to section 44(1) of the Engineering and Geoscience Professions Act (the Act ). The investigation related to allegations that Mr. Harpreet S. Dinsa, P.Eng., (the “Member”) engaged in unprofessional conduct with respect to online commen- tary on the social networking website LinkedIn. On February 9, 2017, APEGA received a complaint from [Complainant A], P.Eng., concerning his public,
online conversation with the Member. It was noted by the complainant that the Member posted unprofessional comments by referring to the complainant in derogatory terms. As a result of the complaint, APEGA began monitoring the Member’s public postings. The Panel noted that these postings also contained derogatory comments towards APEGA and its staff. A. COMPLAINT 1. The Member has engaged in conduct that contra- venes Section 44(1)(b) of the Act and the Code of Ethics #5
68 | PEG SPRING 2018
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker